RE: Reno crash
 

From what I've read, it's thought to be a twisting movement of the fuse vs. the high-G 'skin wrinkle' some think.

No elevator deflection is present to help the high-G theory, some feel it's a 'twist' of the fuse from the rolling axis (note the aileron deflection).

RE: Reno crash
 

WOW..do people not read previous posts??

"It tells me the trim tab fluttered. As with Voodoo - it fluttered so bad the tailwheel fell out AND it broke the elevator torque tube. Now having split elevators - it rolled - to which he corrected and the trim partially tore away - pitching the airplane up.

You can see the trim tab as the aircraft rolls inverted - it is still trailing untill it finally breaks away after the aircraft is inverted. Of course Jimmy is already out due to the G forces and histroy takes it's place........... "

RE: Reno crash
 

:)

This pic doesn't show the tailwheel out.

Perhaps you didn't see the super-slow motion clip at the end of the vid... I didn't see any flutter, You?

RE: Reno crash
 

I don't know when the "wrinkle pic" was taken, but it sure seems like it was before the failure. Twist is consistent with one tab (left) applying down trim/right roll. Aileron deflection may have been while rolling out of a turn, and may not be relevant.

IF the tab was inducing right roll and suddenly failed, that would explain sudden left roll just before the a/c pitched up.

A lot if ifs and maybes.


EDIT: Sorry gentlemen, everything you see now in bold italics above was originally written inside carets, but I realized hours later that for some reason the carets actually made that text invisible for some reason. Weird, I know. The oddity changed the entire meaning of my post, almost inverting it. Sorry for the confusion.
Don.

RE: Reno crash
 

I think the "wrinkle" photo is just a generic photo of the Ghost at some previous time in a race, NOT the accident flight.

RE: Reno crash
 

yes, could be.. however I am wrong or this already happened, but with a luckier pilot?

http://www.warbird.com/voodoo.html

RE: Reno crash
 

In modeling we would say he got a free airplane.... But in his case he got a free life... Looks like the exact same thing happened but with much different results !!!!!


Danno

RE: Reno crash
 

As I said - the same thing happened to Voodoo.

IFR - You really expect to see the trim tab fluttering????????? As for the tailwheel - maybe you should look at the super slow video. The tailwheel drops somewhere between the corrected overbank (possibly from a broken elevator joiner) and the pitch up.

RE: Reno crash
 

Still wondering: why not design in robust horizontal stab down deflection at re-build time to better compensate for the increasing load needed at speed? I.e the elevator trim would have/become less load(ed) rather than be maximally loaded at critical speeds. Higher trim deflections at lower/approach/landing speeds would be required but w/ much less component strain. Tx

Ray

RE: Reno crash
 

Just got this email:

Subject: RENO AIR RACES MAY FLY AGAIN!

I thought it might be of interest to some...

Date: October 3, 2011 9:08:35 PM CDT
To: SARL Sport Air Racing League <[email protected]>

Bobby Graham says...

Good News for the future of air racing.

Our new crew member, Matt Jackson, is not only a race pilot, aircraft
business owner and aircraft owner (he also takes care of Tom Cruises P-51)
but he is also the VP of the Unlimited Racing Class and head of the Safety
Committee.

We had a long talk about the Reno crash on the way to Mojave today.

Matt believes the cause of the crash was due to The Galloping Ghost having a
CG [center of gravity] too close to the aft limit which resulted in pitch instability. There are
instructions on the P-51 regarding no combat missions with the aft fuel tank
full resulting in an aft CG problem. Instructions specify to empty the aft
fuel tank first in flight.

During qualifying Matt watched Galloping Ghost from inside the cockpit of
Furias and could not believe how much trouble Leeward was having in keeping
the Ghost in a stable pattern around the course.

Since Leeward lives in Florida and the Galloping Ghost was modified for
racing in Calif., when Leeward picked up the Ghost for the Reno races at the
last minute, a complete flight test program had not been done based on
available information.

There is a video of the entire last lap of the Ghost before the crash which
Matt showed me. As Leeward was coming around pylon #8 at about 480 mph after
passing Rare Bear, he hit turbulence which pitched his left wing down,
Leeward corrected with hard right rudder and aileron. Just as the aircraft
was straightening out, he hit a second mountain of turbulence which caused
the tail to 'dig in' resulting in a 10+ G climb rendering Leeward
unconscious instantly and resulted in the tail wheel falling out. (broken
tail wheel support structure was found on the course). As the Ghost shot
upward the LH elevator trim tab broke loose. This can be heard on the tape,
so the trim tab did not cause the accident.

Since the Ghost was racing at 480 mph with full right rudder and the stick
full right, this is where everything stayed when Leeward blacked out.
Cockpit camera film that was salvaged from the wreck shows Leeward slumped
over to the right in the cockpit. As a result, the Ghost climbed up and to
the right, rolled over on her back and then headed for the box seats. Most
in the box seats never saw it coming because it came in from behind them.

Matt has had long conversations with the NTSB who call the accident a
'fluke'. They are not going to recommend canceling future races. He has also
talked to the insurance companies covering the races for Reno and they also
say they are not going to cancel their coverage of future races. Now we wait
for the FAA to make a decision.

Ironically, Matt bought box seats tickets for his good friends who stayed
with him for a few days before the races. They were the husband and wife who
were killed.

RE: Reno crash
 

As I said to my brother when he sent me a copy of that email last week, the phrase "a complete flight test program had not been done based on available information" is going to cause them a lot of problems. I sincerely hope that the races can continue, but they are going to *have* to make some substantive changes if they are going to race again. To *not* do that would be to invite huge liability should something happen again. I believe at a minimum, some requirement for a significant amount of flight testing before an aircraft can race, and some additional protection/setback for the spectators is not only prudent, but will (or should be) required by those insuring the races in the future - regardless of what the authorities do.

BTW, I'm not sure I buy completely the "aft CG" argument of the loss of control. I think we'll have to wait for the NTSB report to see if it was that, or the fact that something broke, that resulted in the pitch-up.

Bob

RE: Reno crash
 

Sorry...sounds like BS to me. The moment the pilot passed out, the flight controls would return to the trimmed position...not stay stuck "full right and right".

Beave

RE: Reno crash
 

Boy. Where does one begin. First of all, this is totally third "hand +" information. If I were "Matt" I might be a little concerned about the paraphrasing that was going on in that email. It makes him sound less than flattering - But I'll be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt personally, I'm sure there was more to it. To think there will be no repercussions to insurance coverage due to this sort of risk that is now fully assumed, then someone doesn't paraphrase with much prejudice. (rumor has it Loyd's of London is losing their six on this one, and hard). Sure, you "might" be able to insure it again, but for how much? This is a business venture to run the races, not a charity to an insurance backer. It will not make $ sense if it's not affordable. And to think this isn't gonna be a big deal in the aviation community because it's a "fluke?" There aren't "flukes" in aviation. The program doesn't work that way. One man's fluke is another agencies blood priority battle call for big changes. So in other words, it's probably not going to be "business as usual" as it was in the past.

I'm the biggest fan of the Reno Air Races I know. I want them to continue on in one form or another. But I can't even stand by and act like this wasn't a big deal since the people in the box seats "allegedly" didn't know what hit them, so that probably makes it easier to move on from, or less severe? Sorry, we all saw it coming. It was obvious to EVERYONE, we just didn't know where it was gonna end up as it was wagging all over the sky like a stuck pig. Anyway, what was the point of that comment? Again, it's all paraphrasing, it's hard to know what to take seriously if anything. One thing's for sure though. I hope the aviation community can come up with some solid, creative and good solutions to make the races an agreeable form of entertainment. And a credible aviation exhibition that can be a positive thing again for airplane nuts and public alike. To bury heads in sand isn't a good start though.

RE: Reno crash
 

They trim the planes to pull up to the right so if they have a problem they will leave the pattern ! So that is not BS ! [:@]

RE: Reno crash
 

Why would VooDoo climb straight up to after the driver G-LOC'd? I wasn't there, but that's what was said about VooDoo.

RE: Reno crash
 

Um...yes...it is.

Beave